Scientific Illustration: More than Pretty Pictures

Smart nature straight to your inbox every week

Sign up for the newsletter

By Dayna Gross, Silver Creek Preserve manager

Scientific illustration is more than just pretty pictures — a point made quite clearly in my own work at the Conservancy’s Silver Creek Preserve, as we tried to convey restoration plans to the general public.

For as long as I can remember I have enjoyed painting flowers, insects, and landscapes. There is something so enjoyable about capturing colors and textures in paintings.

In the last ten years this hobby has expanded into my work: illustration has become key in how I view the world, understand conservation and communicate ideas.

Science has always relied on visual representation to convey key concepts. While representation has varied from Audubon’s bird paintings to high-tech GPS imagery, illustration has at is core always been about conveying information.

However, while we have inarguably made amazing advancements in information technology, high-tech does not always mean “easy to understand.”

The history of scientific illustration dates back at least to 500 AD, when there was a rising need to depict and record medicinal plants. Illustrators often used watercolors in combination with ink because of the clarity and simplicity of the medium.

The strength of the illustrations is that they can show what is unobservable to the eye while emphasizing certain important details or features missed by the scientific description or, today, by photographs.

For almost two thousand years, these illustrations have enhanced scientific communication by merging art and science. Today, they are increasingly important in our conservation work where science and communication are rarely separate.

The importance of illustrations was reinforced for me during a public hearing on a restoration project we are working on at Silver Creek.

For months I had been explaining the restoration designs to people using the computer-aided design (CAD) produced by engineers.

Because I could visualize the design clearly in these drawings, I assumed others could as well. However, as we got further into the design and developed more detailed CAD drawings I started to see confusion, miscommunication, and sometimes a complete misunderstanding of the project details.

People wanted to visualize what the restoration project would look like. So I decided to illustrate our plans.

The above illustration is a computer aided design drawing by our engineers. It is one dimensional and includes details that most people don’t need. Without an in-depth knowledge of restoration ecology, it’s very difficult to understand.

Above is a bird’s eye illustration of the design I created. Using colored pencil and pen allowed me to show detail but also create a more natural looking view.

Shadows give it depth not felt in the CAD drawing. Anyone can now see what the restoration will look like when completed.

This (above) is the engineers’ drawing of the dam structure (courtesy of Brockway Engineering). The only drawings we had were in the plan view and it was difficult to tell from this plan what people would actually be able to see.

For instance, the pipes shown here will be covered with rock and not be visible.

Above is a perspective illustration of the dam structure. Not only did this clarify for folks what the end product would be, it helped me clarify details with the engineers and assure we were on the same page.

The response was overwhelming.

People could see and understand the project. There was less confusion resulting in greater support for the entire project. Having the ability to emphasize elements of the project not clear in the drafted drawings and relate to people’s aesthetic interests has been priceless in our communication of this complex and science-based restoration project.

Opinions expressed on Cool Green Science and in any corresponding comments are the personal opinions of the original authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Nature Conservancy.

Join the Discussion

Great post, Dayna. I couldn’t agree more with your point on using illustrations to clarify the point you’re trying to get across. The “perfect” photograph is often hard to get and includes a lot of noise, for lack of a better term, or distraction. A nice illustration can focus the viewer’s attention on exactly what you want them to see.

Great to see this, Dayna. All of the information, from illustrations to reports and communications, is amazing. Best of luck as you tackle this significant amount of work. I cannot wait to see the results soon.

Dayna,
Thanks for your latest “blog” from Silver Creek and for illustrating what we will see in the finished design! You’ve got me convinced to pay you all another visit and to admire and enjoy the preserve once again.

Thank you Dayna for pointing out the value of illustration and how it invites the viewer to see the unobservable and see things differently than a photo, gis map or graph. As a huge fan of your illustration, I love how it makes me feel like I am right there with you and my imagination can fill in the blanks. Would you please teach me how you do it?

Way to go, Dayna! Love the application of your landscape architecture talents to build consensus and confidence in a project. We’re looking to apply this approach to our preserves in Georgia to help visitors better understand the value of a place, and thereby grow our constituency for nature. There’s such a huge potential to apply landscape illustration techniques across the Conservancy, and you’ve helped your fellow on-staff designers make this case. Well done and thank you.

We hear quite often from trustees and donors that they feel TNC does great work, and that the work we do is complex and hard to understand. I love these illustrations – Art invites people in. A beautiful and simple way to explain some of our work.

Beautiful illustrations that nicely capture the intended design. Consultants should be given clear instructions to avoid the clumsy and uninformative kinds of illustrations presented here. Saturated color should be used sparingly, otherwise, it hides and confuses readers. And engineering plans for structures are seldom beneficial to anyone who is not an engineer. Perspective drawings are much easier to interpret.

[…] Sometimes a good illustration says more than a high-tech computer visual representation: Advancements in technology can create visual representations that can convey a lot of information, but the new high-tech pictures aren’t always easy to understand, especially for the general public. The Cool Green Science blog writes: ” … For months I had been explaining the restoration designs to people using the computer-aided design (CAD) produced by engineers. Because I could visualize the design clearly in these drawings, I assumed others could as well. However, as we got further into the design and developed more detailed CAD drawings I started to see confusion, miscommunication, and sometimes a complete misunderstanding of the project details. People wanted to visualize what the restoration project would look like. So I decided to illustrate our plans. … “ See the results and read more from the Cool Green Science blog here: Scientific Illustration: More than Pretty Pictures […]

Wonderful post, Dayna! It offers a unique (and beautiful) example of how we can improve our science communication to better engage with the community. We are so lucky to have such a talentd conservationist and artist on our side!

I enjoyed your article very much Dayna. Scientific illustration is definitely more than pretty pictures. I agree completely. I’m active myself more in life sciences, but the same is true in that sub-domain.
Keep up the great work!
Luk

[…] when it comes down to it, I like to look and examine things very closely and I think that is where my interest in scientific illustration comes from. The combination of the two — liking to look up close, and appreciating the beauty of […]